LTP News Sharing:
AP Photo/Evan Vucci
For Democrats wondering why Nate Silver is not bearish on a Kamala presidency, look no further than her failed 2020 run. Does she do better in key voter demographics that Democrats need to win elections? Sure, but is she that much better? No. Mr. Silver might add some nuance, noting that Harris does considerably better with nonwhite and young voters, but if Trump still has a 60 percent chance of clinching 270 electoral votes—what’s the difference? The popular vote isn’t the ballgame; you know this.
For all the bluster and media cushioning provided to Ms. Harris, her odds of winning decreased during the Democrat’s convention in Chicago in August. Earlier this week, the latest Electoral College projection sat at 56 percent for Mr. Trump. On Friday, it ticked up past 60 percent. The odds of Trump winning Pennsylvania must make the Harris camp nervous. That is the ballgame on election night (Silver Bulletin):
—-
Post on X
Joe Concha @JoeConchaTV
Geez. Silver’s forecast just released. Has Trump winning every swing state and has his chances 24 points above Harris winning PA.
The Harris campaign now hinges on her ability to speak extemporaneously without a teleprompter during a 90 minute debate.
InteractivePolls @IAPolls2022
#Latest @NateSilver538 forecast (chance of winning):
_______
August 23
🟦 Harris: 53.5%
🟥 Trump: 46.1%
September 6
🟥 Trump: 61.5%
🟦 Harris: 38.3%
——
Swing States: chance of winning:
Pennsylvania – 🔴 Trump 62-38%
Michigan – 🔴 Trump 52-48%
Wisconsin – 🔴 Trump 52-48%
Arizona – 🔴 Trump 75-25%
North Carolina – 🔴 Trump 74-26%
Georgia – 🔴 Trump 67-33%
Nevada – 🔴 Trump 59-41%
——
@Polymarket
odds
🟥 Trump: 53%
🟦 Harris: 45%
_____
Polymarket swing states odds 👇
https://polymarket.com/elections
——
For today, though, let’s talk about the elephant in the room: the Electoral College is starting to look like a challenge for Kamala Harris. This was a problem for Democrats in 2016, of course, and also in 2020 — when Joe Biden won the popular vote by 4.5 points, but the tipping-point state, Wisconsin, went for Biden by only 0.6 points.
There’s been a lot of talk lately about our model’s convention bounce adjustment, and that’s understandable. Harris is still ever-so-slightly ahead in our polling averages in enough states for her to win 270 electoral votes — but she’s slightly behind in our forecast of those states, mostly because the model assumes that polls conducted just after the DNC are likely to be relatively favorable for Harris.
I think the adjustment is highly defensible, but if you don’t like it, don’t fret: it will begin to work its way out of the model over the course of the next week or two. And if you really hate it, you can always just stick to our “raw” polling averages instead, which aren’t subject to the convention bounce adjustment at all.
The problem for Harris is that Donald Trump has been gaining on her in our polling averages, too — at least in the most important Electoral College states. If, say, Harris had gained 1 point, when the convention bounce adjustment was expecting her to gain 2 points, that would look like more of a rounding error in the model. Instead, though, she’s actually losing ground since the start of the convention in swing state polls.
The September 10 debate will be the decisive event of this election. If Trump doesn’t implode, attacks Harris’ record, and forces her to expound on her shallow-deep grasp on the issues, we can all breathe easier. The vice president has done 180-degree turns on most of her agenda for 2020 when she ran for president. What’s the reason behind the changes, Kamala? We know—but Trump needs to hit a home run on this, that she’s Hillary Clinton 2.0 but worse: a woman who will do and say anything to get elected and then impose Soviet-style reforms, like price controls, to combat the inflation she caused.
